Roy Moore suspended... again.

[TLK Valentine]

God

So why didn't He weigh in on the issue during all the time it was being debated in court? I mean, this was kicked around for months, and He didn't so much as file a single amicus brief...

 

[TLK Valentine]

So, when you say "the state," that includes the states of Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, correct? If those states try to legislate moral or religious issues, such as, for example, allowing same-sex marriage, well, they've overstepped their bounds, haven't they?

Still waiting for an answer on this one, Menno...

 

[Vylo]

There is no such thing as a legal marriage outside of a spiritual marriage. Attempts to do so are simply false. Thus, sexual unions of the same gender are illegitimate.

In America there is. You might be thinking of Saudi Arabia.

 

[MennoSota]

So why didn't He weigh in on the issue during all the time it was being debated in court? I mean, this was kicked around for months, and He didn't so much as file a single amicus brief...

He did and you rejected it. You're the problem, not God.

 

[MennoSota]

Still waiting for an answer on this one, Menno...

Marriage is spiritual. States should stay out of marriage entirely.
If society endorses marriage, it must be according to God's definition or else the definition is illegitimate.

 

[TLK Valentine]

He did and you rejected it. You're the problem, not God.

Where was his brief? I followed the court case pretty closely; didn't hear anything from His lawyers...

By the way...

So, when you say "the state," that includes the states of Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, correct? If those states try to legislate moral or religious issues, such as, for example, allowing same-sex marriage, well, they've overstepped their bounds, haven't they?

Still waiting for an answer.

 

[MennoSota]

In America there is. You might be thinking of Saudi Arabia.

Nope, there isn't. Marriage is defined by God. Any attempt to redefine it is illegitimate.

 

[lasthero]

Marriage is spiritual. States should stay out of marriage entirely.
If society endorses marriage, it must be according to God's definition or else the definition is illegitimate.

We're sorry you feel that way.

The Supreme Court disagrees. Unlike you, their opinion matters.

 

[smaneck]

So why didn't He weigh in on the issue during all the time it was being debated in court? I mean, this was kicked around for months, and He didn't so much as file a single amicus brief...

Of course, the First Amendment excludes God having a say, however, if anyone had filed an amicus brief on on behalf of Mennosota's argument that the government whether state or federal should not have a say in issues related to marriage period it might have made it a different case entirely as the 14th Amendment would not come into play. Wouldn't stop gay marriages, of course, for reasons I've already mentioned. And failure to bake that cake would still constitute discrimination.

 

[lasthero]

Nope, there isn't. Marriage is defined by God. Any attempt to redefine it is illegitimate.

I love how you keep saying this like it actually means anything.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Marriage is spiritual. States should stay out of marriage entirely.

So when the states I mentioned tried to legislate marriage, the higher courts had the right -- no, they had the duty -- to step in and tell them they couldn't do it, correct?

If society endorses marriage, it must be according to God's definition or else the definition is illegitimate.

Nice fantasy -- however, in the real world, we allow divorcees, atheists, and all sorts of people you would must likely consider "illegitimate" to marry -- you can even do it without a church.

So, since we're talking about the real world and not some spiritual utopia, back to my point: When a state tries to legislate marriage, the higher courts should step in and tell them not to do that, correct?

 

[Vylo]

Nope, there isn't. Marriage is defined by God. Any attempt to redefine it is illegitimate.

That holds no legal water, so it will be dismissed.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Of course, the First Amendment excludes God having a say, however, in anyone had filed an amicus brief on on behalf of Mennosota's argument that the government whether state or federal should not have a say in issues related to marriage period it might have made it a different case entirely as the 14th Amendment would not come into play. Wouldn't stop gay marriages, of course, for reasons I've already mentioned. And failure to bake that cake would still constitute discrimination.

The problem is that saying what the government should do in light of what the government has been doing for centuries is pretty much a textbook example of closing the barn door after the horses have all eloped.

Never mind the 14th Amendment -- such an argument wouldn't even pass the laugh test.

 

[smaneck]

The problem is that saying what the government should do in light of what the government has been doing for centuries is pretty much a textbook example of closing the barn door after the horses have all eloped

I would say that the barn door wasn't closed until Obergefell v. Kasich. If it is had been made earlier it might have been seriously considered. Truth is, the arguments made by attorneys arguing against same-sex marriage were terribly weak because the true reason for opposing gay marriage was religious, an argument disallowed by the Constitution. So they ended up making up a bunch of bogus arguments that were easily dismantled.

Never mind the 14th Amendment -- such an argument wouldn't even pass the laugh test.

Gay marriages wouldn't have passed the laugh test a few decades ago. The real reason this argument is not being made by most on the right is want to keep the advantages given to married couples under the law, they just don't want to extend them to gays. And it wouldn't help the cause of right-wing evangelicals anyhow because if marriages are no longer sanctioned by the state gays would just get married in churches willing to accept their union. And there are plenty of those.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I would say that the barn door wasn't closed until Obergefell v. Kasich. If it is had been made earlier it might have been seriously considered. Truth is, the arguments made by attorneys arguing against same-sex marriage were terribly weak because the true reason for opposing gay marriage was religious, an argument disallowed by the Constitution. So they ended up making up a bunch of bogus arguments that were easily dismantled.

Indeed -- so why didn't they just tell the truth?

Gay marriages wouldn't have passed the laugh test a few decades ago.

neither would interracial marriages a few decades before that...

The real reason this argument is not being made by most on the right is want to keep the advantages given to married couples under the law, they just don't want to extend them to gays.

Gee, I wonder why?

And it wouldn't help the cause of right-wing evangelicals anyhow because if marriages are no longer sanctioned by the state gays would just get married in churches willing to accept their union. And there is plenty of those.

And there are plenty of ordained ministers willing to perform the ceremony. I should know; I'm one of them.

 

[smaneck]

Indeed -- so why didn't they just tell the truth?

Oh, there's this little matter of the separation of church and state.

neither would interracial marriages a few decades before that...

I think most states did allow interracial marriages. They were prohibited only in the South.

And there are plenty of ordained ministers willing to perform the ceremony. I should know; I'm one of them.

Universal Life Church?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Oh, there's this little matter of the separation of church and state.

Ah, that little wrinkle...

I think most states did allow interracial marriages. They were prohibited only in the South.

That... doesn't make it any less a civil rights abomination.

Universal Life Church?

But of course.

 

[AirPo]

He did and you rejected it. You're the problem, not God.

Actually, it seems like that is your problem.

 

[AirPo]

Marriage is spiritual. States should stay out of marriage entirely.
If society endorses marriage, it must be according to God's definition or else the definition is illegitimate.

It's also a legal contract between two individuals and the state. God's definition, more acturately, your intrepataion of God's definition, has nothing to do with that.

 

[MennoSota]

It's also a legal contract between two individuals and the state. God's definition, more acturately, your intrepataion of God's definition, has nothing to do with that.

There is no law in Alabama that applies to same-sex unions. Therefore the judge has broken no laws.